ESPN: Is Caitlin Clark or Paige Bueckers the nation's top player?

[Brewski]

I know this topic is like a horse that's been beaten to death, but it's a fun & exhausting (quite literally) statistical diatribe comparing two pretty good basketball players. The "conclusion" did not change my mind, but then again, the stench of my bias is quite overwhelming.

Is Caitlin Clark or Paige Bueckers the nation's top player?

Caitlin Clark is the better scorer and playmaker. Paige Bueckers has a more complete game. Is the UConn star really as good offensively?

www.espn.com

 

[Veteran]

I’m an old classic rock fan from before we had to call it classic. Back in the day I liked some sort of obscure bands that eventually became popular. One example is the band Supertramp, which became a huge hit when their “Breakfast in America” album came out. But in my opinion their earlier album “Crime of the Century” was one of the best ever recorded. So, in those days I wanted to find a T-Shirt that said “Supertramp Fan before Breakfast in America”.

Fast forward to today, I love all the attention that Caitlin Clark mania has brought to what I think is the greatest game in all of sports. It’s long overdue. But all the same, these days I’d love to find a T-Shirt that says, “WCBB Fan before Caitlin Clark”. Some may agree with my thinking.

Anyway, my answer is Paige, but I'm less than totally objective on the whole thing.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Asking that question this season reflects very positively on P. Buckets!

 

[Zarathustra]

IMHO .... They are both extraordinary players.... How to compare "greatness"?
of course, Paige does "PAIGE THINGS"!! Go Huskies!!

 

[Sluconn Husky]

Clark is involved in nearly every Iowa play on offense and expends almost no energy on defense. Neither thing can be said about Bueckers. So comparing them statistically straight up is apples and oranges.

Also, Bueckers is essentially a year and a half behind Clark due to injuries. It would be a more fair and accurate comparison to use Bueckers' play a year from now, but she'll never put Clark's gaudy stats at UConn just as Stewart, Moore, and Tarurasi didn't, and as Delle Donne would not have either.

 

[Monte]

Ask again at midnight on Friday!

 

[jdote33]

Yeah it's kinda hard to compare. I'm bias as well.

What's interesting to me is to see how they've kinda evolved.I do see Caitlyn as more of a point guard, I think she's mainly effective with the ball in her hands. I think cuz she scores a lot and shoots a lot ppl see her as a 2 but I do think she needs to improve working off screens, in the mid range, etc. But she has the ball on a string and plays with pace. Like controls the tempo of the game and never gets tired. On the flip side I always thought of Paige as a PG but I kind of like her as a 3 now. She's improved a lot in the post and cutting to the basket. She can obviously play make, but in terms of managing a game I think she'd rather split time with someone else doing it.

I was thinking of a comparison earlier but it was more on the men's side. I was thinking it's kinda like comparing Luka and Jayson Tatum. Luka's incredible, fills up the stat sheet, probably does more for his team than anyone else. Tatum is great, plays both sides. Sometimes doesn't need to shoulder the load because of talent. But in any game vs any team can be the best player on the court. Of course most ppl say Luka > Tatum.

I know Diana and Alana Beard were compared but I never really saw it respectfully. Sylvia Fowles and Candace Parker obviously totally different positions but comparable in terms of being like a pick em between two great players. Jackie Stiles and Sue Bird? But I don't remember them being compared although I was a bit young at the time.

 

[BobbyJ]

This guy claims Clark is the better playmaker because he goes by assist stats. What he's missing is that Clark has the ball in her hands 85% of the time. If UConn's offense allowed for Bueckers to dribble freely anywhere, take unlimited shots, draw the double and triple teams, and then throw passes to open kids for layups and open 3s, she'd be putting up the same numbers.

 

[BobbyJ]

Yeah it's kinda hard to compare. I'm bias as well.

What's interesting to me is to see how they've kinda evolved.I do see Caitlyn as more of a point guard, I think she's mainly effective with the ball in her hands. I think cuz she scores a lot and shoots a lot ppl see her as a 2 but I do think she needs to improve working off screens, in the mid range, etc. But she has the ball on a string and plays with pace. Like controls the tempo of the game and never gets tired. On the flip side I always thought of Paige as a PG but I kind of like her as a 3 now. She's improved a lot in the post and cutting to the basket. She can obviously play make, but in terms of managing a game I think she'd rather split time with someone else doing it.

I was thinking of a comparison earlier but it was more on the men's side. I was thinking it's kinda like comparing Luka and Jayson Tatum. Luka's incredible, fills up the stat sheet, probably does more for his team than anyone else. Tatum is great, plays both sides. Sometimes doesn't need to shoulder the load because of talent. But in any game vs any team can be the best player on the court. Of course most ppl say Luka > Tatum.

I know Diana and Alana Beard were compared but I never really saw it respectfully. Sylvia Fowles and Candace Parker obviously totally different positions but comparable in terms of being like a pick em between two great players. Jackie Stiles and Sue Bird? But I don't remember them being compared although I was a bit young at the time.

NBA Rumors: Luka Dončić's Playing Style Deters Some Players from Joining Mavericks

Luka Dončić is the main reason the Dallas Mavericks are a factor in the Western Conference playoff race, but his style of play might also be hindering them…

bleacherreport.com

I'll wait to see what happens when Clark gets to the WNBA.

 

[Rowdy831]

Caitlin is a remarkable player and really gets a lot out of a team of role players. Paige has a much better cast around her and she plays on a team that runs an offense, not an offense centered around Paige. Paige is also asked to play against much bigger and stronger players every night on defense which also puts her in a different class than CC.

I have put it this way. If I needed a player to come in and sell tickets for a team that wasn't very good I would take Caitlin Clark. She had a great entertainment aspect to her game. If I had a good team that I wanted to make great I would take Paige. I think she is a better basketball player even if she isn't quite as flashy on offense.

 

[BBallF]

Remember you are comparing a senior in years played (Clark) to a junior less half a season in Paige. Either way, you are looking at the faces of American womens' basketball in the future. I can imagine a National team someday with those 2 in the backcourt. Whoever is at the 3-4 or 5 on that team will be getting some pretty perfect passes.

 

[diggerfoot]

The author dishes out the consistent media trope regarding the heavy burden Clark has in carrying a team not loaded with five star players. Those players are good shooters that have had the opportunity of playing together for a long time and averaging 5% points better than Clark at shooting.

Also, Clark’s teammates efficient shootings boost her assists number, so that she has a 1.85 A/T ration rather than something like 1.75. Good, but not great due to her high turnover rate. Bueckers was 2.75. These are all regular season numbers. The author’s somewhat advanced metrics still omits important data.

In other words, I think Bueckers playmaking ability is just fine, even with being 1 1/2 years behind and playing with much different line ups from her freshman year on.

 

[oldude]

Really well done analysis of the two players. I have stated previously that Clark absolutely deserves the NPOY award. But if I were picking between the two at the next level, I would choose Paige hands down.

It’s not unlike the situation on the men’s side where Purdue’s Zach Edey is the likely NPOY. But most pro scouts rate Donovan Clingan as the better pro prospect.

 

[oldude]

Caitlin is a remarkable player and really gets a lot out of a team of role players. Paige has a much better cast around her and she plays on a team that runs an offense, not an offense centered around Paige. Paige is also asked to play against much bigger and stronger players every night on defense which also puts her in a different class than CC.

I have put it this way. If I needed a player to come in and sell tickets for a team that wasn't very good I would take Caitlin Clark. She had a great entertainment aspect to her game. If I had a good team that I wanted to make great I would take Paige. I think she is a better basketball player even if she isn't quite as flashy on offense.

As for Paige having a better cast around her, you have to adjust for experience and depth. Clearly, Iowa has more of both.

 

[Rowdy831]

The author dishes out the consistent media trope regarding the heavy burden Clark has in carrying a team not loaded with five star players. Those players are good shooters that have had the opportunity of playing together for a long time and averaging 5% points better than Clark at shooting.

Also, Clark’s teammates efficient shootings boost her assists number, so that she has a 1.85 A/T ration rather than something like 1.75. Good, but not great due to her high turnover rate. Bueckers was 2.75. These are all regular season numbers. The author’s somewhat advanced metrics still omits important data.

In other words, I think Bueckers playmaking ability is just fine, even with being 1 1/2 years behind and playing with much different line ups from her freshman year on.

I thought the data they used was designed to make CC look like the better all around player and that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[good2go]

I thought the data they used was designed to make CC look like the better all around player and that couldn't be further from the truth.

ESPN has so much invested in Caitlin Clark that she had to be their choice. It was a forgone conclusion.

 

[BRS24]

Well, this is interesting -

 

[BBallF]

Well, this is interesting -

She would know because she was exactly that and has 3 rings to prove it!

 

[EricSD]

The author dishes out the consistent media trope regarding the heavy burden Clark has in carrying a team not loaded with five star players. Those players are good shooters that have had the opportunity of playing together for a long time and averaging 5% points better than Clark at shooting.

Also, Clark’s teammates efficient shootings boost her assists number, so that she has a 1.85 A/T ration rather than something like 1.75. Good, but not great due to her high turnover rate. Bueckers was 2.75. These are all regular season numbers. The author’s somewhat advanced metrics still omits important data.

In other words, I think Bueckers playmaking ability is just fine, even with being 1 1/2 years behind and playing with much different line ups from her freshman year on.

The interesting thing about that - what was Aaliyah rated coming out of HS? How about Nika? And even tho KK was in the top 10 and Ash in the top 20, both are freshmen. Not to mention the only 2 core subs off the bench are freshmen also. So where is all this "star power" that gets bandied about?

Point is, Iowa may not have the "big name higher rated recruits", but their roster is full of 5th year seniors, grad transfers, etc. in addition to Clark. Stulke is a sophomore, and Affolter, who started a handful of games, is a junior.

So while Iowa may not have the over-hyped "star power", they literally have like 10+ years more experience than our 2 freshman starters and 2 freshmen core players off the bench.

For the record I thought it was overall a good article, but to give such high props to Clark for having no "stars" completely discounts that out of our 7 players, literally 4 of them are freshmen...

 

[TheFarmFan]

I have put it this way. If I needed a player to come in and sell tickets for a team that wasn't very good I would take Caitlin Clark. She had a great entertainment aspect to her game.

So perfect for the Indiana Fever.

If I had a good team that I wanted to make great I would take Paige. I think she is a better basketball player even if she isn't quite as flashy on offense.

So perfect for the new Bay Area franchise launching in 2025, just in time to draft Paige as the new face of the franchise, alongside Nneka and Brink. =) (a guy can dream, after all.)

 

[FormerCTrez]

Both CC and PB are great players who help their teams tremendously. But because I’m biased, I’ll say Paige is the best. However, Caitlin puts up some fierce shots to help her team win, while Paige is a better delegator, and thus a team-win seems more appreciative. I would’ve been ecstatic if they both played for UConn, but that’s not the case, so I’m going with who got my team to the FF, and that’s Paige and the gang. Go UConn! Go Huskies!

 

[DRR25]

I’m an old classic rock fan from before we had to call it classic. Back in the day I liked some sort of obscure bands that eventually became popular. One example is the band Supertramp, which became a huge hit when their “Breakfast in America” album came out. But in my opinion their earlier album “Crime of the Century” was one of the best ever recorded. So, in those days I wanted to find a T-Shirt that said “Supertramp Fan before Breakfast in America”.

Fast forward to today, I love all the attention that Caitlin Clark mania has brought to what I think is the greatest game in all of sports. It’s long overdue. But all the same, these days I’d love to find a T-Shirt that says, “WCBB Fan before Caitlin Clark”. Some may agree with my thinking.

Anyway, my answer is Paige, but I'm less than totally objective on the whole thing.

I'm with you on the WCBB fan before Clark. I've seen I don't know how many "I'm only here because of Caitlin Clark. When she leaves Iowa, I won't watch WBB again" comments, and I just wanna say "Bye. Don't let the door hit you..." And the CC fans who have no idea who Breanna Stewart (let alone some of the old timers). I'm not even a big UConn fan but you shouldn't be allowed to watch WCBB if you don't know who Stewie is.

 

[Pharos]

Let's look at it from another angle. Compare Caitlin and Paige as the player you'd have the hardest time stopping. Will Iowa be able to stop Paige? Will UConn be able to stop Caitlin? Use the most recent game to think about it. Juju scored, but she was very contained. Paige not so much. Paige gets where she want to be and exploits -- on offense... and defense. Not as sure Caitlin is that able.

 

[Pharos]

I’m an old classic rock fan from before we had to call it classic. Back in the day I liked some sort of obscure bands that eventually became popular. One example is the band Supertramp, which became a huge hit when their “Breakfast in America” album came out. But in my opinion their earlier album “Crime of the Century” was one of the best ever recorded. So, in those days I wanted to find a T-Shirt that said “Supertramp Fan before Breakfast in America”.

Fast forward to today, I love all the attention that Caitlin Clark mania has brought to what I think is the greatest game in all of sports. It’s long overdue. But all the same, these days I’d love to find a T-Shirt that says, “WCBB Fan before Caitlin Clark”. Some may agree with my thinking.

Anyway, my answer is Paige, but I'm less than totally objective on the whole thing.

Not sure about Supertramp. I compare my UConn fanship to my fanship of the Grateful Dead. In their hayday, people loved 'em... or not. The Springstein fans never "got" the Dead. You know what? My favorite Dead song now is Attics of My Life -- "
"When I had no wings to fly
You flew to me"
... might almost be a theme for this year's UConn WBB team. Change it to
"When I had no wings to fly
You flew... for... me"
Think Paige was saying that in her postgame interview. : )

 

[Orc]

Well, this is interesting -

Paige can score in variety of ways. Shes a better all around player. Majority of Clarks points comes from layups and 3pt shots

 

[Veteran]

Not sure about Supertramp. I compare my UConn fanship to my fanship of the Grateful Dead. In their hayday, people loved 'em... or not. The Springstein fans never "got" the Dead. You know what? My favorite Dead song now is Attics of My Life -- "
"When I had no wings to fly
You flew to me"
... might almost be a theme for this year's UConn WBB team. Change it to
"When I had no wings to fly
You flew... for... me"
Think Paige was saying that in her postgame interview. : )

The Dead were immense. True greatness. I still listen to them constantly. "Ripple" may have been my favorite Dead song although there was a great deal of enhanced partying that occurred when cruising around with my buddies as "Truckin'" came on the radio.

I'll mention another one of my old T-Shirt fantasies. The band was Fleetwood Mac back when they were more of a bluesy oriented band in the days of the "Mystery to Me" album. Then they became more of a pop band when Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham joined the group. And I'm not complaining. The song "Rhiannon" came out when I was in The Army and it cost me hundreds of dollars more in future stereo equipment expenses as soon as I heard it on a really good sound system owned by one of the guys in the barracks. But all the same, I loved the old bluesy version of the band and there was a time when I wanted a "Fleetwood Mac Fan before Stevie Nicks" T-Shirt, too.

 

[Pharos]

 

[The deacon]

Clark... expends almost no energy on defense.

 

[Bone Dog]

The Dead were immense. True greatness. I still listen to them constantly. "Ripple" may have been my favorite Dead song although there was a great deal of enhanced partying that occurred when cruising around with my buddies as "Truckin'" came on the radio.

The Dead pre-Europe 1972. Pigpen Dead. Skull and Roses Dead. Live/Dead Dead. New New Minglewood Blues. Aoxomoxoa. Me and My Uncle. Not Fade Away.

But that era ended, when it was Jerry and Phil's band. Sigh.

 

[diggerfoot]

The interesting thing about that - what was Aaliyah rated coming out of HS? How about Nika? And even tho KK was in the top 10 and Ash in the top 20, both are freshmen. Not to mention the only 2 core subs off the bench are freshmen also. So where is all this "star power" that gets bandied about?

Point is, Iowa may not have the "big name higher rated recruits", but their roster is full of 5th year seniors, grad transfers, etc. in addition to Clark. Stulke is a sophomore, and Affolter, who started a handful of games, is a junior.

So while Iowa may not have the over-hyped "star power", they literally have like 10+ years more experience than our 2 freshman starters and 2 freshmen core players off the bench.

For the record I thought it was overall a good article, but to give such high props to Clark for having no "stars" completely discounts that out of our 7 players, literally 4 of them are freshmen...

I suppose the author attempted a balanced, empirical approach for the most part, but he also uses the “heavy burden” hyperbole that has become a media mantra. I should just let this go. After all, I’m not an Iowa fan. Why should I stick up for the team as a whole?

I will make a prediction, though, in response to the author believing Clark is better suited for PG and Bueckers more suited for the three. Clark will play SG in the WNBA, Bueckers will play PG.